Miscellaneous News

emblem21

Major
Registered Member
It was too obvious of a suggestion to pass. Its good for a stunt and nothing else.

If it was me I would suggest a statute of Norman Bethune.
Can the USA afford to try such a stunt now, given that the USA supply chain is in shambles and that the USA now has two enemies with nuclear weapons with an extremely fast delivery and a global south that has almost enough of their bullshit. Really, if the USA continues to behave in this fashion, they might find themselves on their own completely with no more cheap goods and valuable resources to keep themselves alive. Not to mention the Europeans are bound to abandon them if they cut and run from Ukraine like Afghanistan. Just because the EU is lead by sycophants doesn’t mean they people there are going to be happy to be cut off from much of their resources that they once can get before the USA decided to screw things up and the Middle East has started to get real sick of being told what to do they this relaxers from the EU that seem to completely believe that they can order other nations around like they are still in the colonial age. If Biden Ends up being responsible for two big scandals, things are not going to favor the USA much at all in the coming future and if for some reason the USA ends up destroying themselves, they might end up being stuffed into concentration camps themselves if they are unlucky
 

BlackWindMnt

Captain
Registered Member
This is the problem with what Mahbubani is saying.

We have to understand what he is saying before we can comment on the glaring fault.

ASEAN is sitting on the fence, because they would like the United States to return to being the old United States of the past, who put their money onto those trade deals, like TPP.

The United States actively engaging with ASEAN is a perfect counter balance to China.

Note, that is the difference between ASEAN and the United States.

For ASEAN, China, is China.

For the United States, China is China! China, China, Chyna!

So that is a natural and expected position or goal of ASEAN, keep the Americans engaged in the region in a constructive way, and that would be a counterbalance to China.

:confused:

What is wrong with this plan or strategy is too obvious.

It is not necessarily a specific thing, just think about it in terms of risk.

Suppose that NATO is on the losing side of that current war. Would the Americans go home? They not overly interested in ASEAN now, why would anyone expect them to be more interested in ASEAN if that war does not turn out well? Remember, Uncle Vlad has not lost a war yet.

Then suppose, President Trump makes a comeback!!! Haha! Haha! Hehehe! That probably is a 50/50 chance. Just thinking about that is too funny!

There could be other unexpected events. Suppose the Chinese announce that they will have their own DUVi and EUV up and running soon. Make that declaration at the same time of both being ready. There will be some major butt hurt in the region if that news breaks. Side with the Americans working with them and this is what we get? Chinese appearance of DUVi and EUV will be black swan events.

The Chinese like to gamble.

The Chinese listen to ASEAN. Think about the risks. Then say, "Okay, that is acceptable to us, we play."

Then ... and then ... the Chinese will support Russia all the way, and work on the DUV and EUV.

The Chinese just are not easy to deal with. It was not even their proposal.

Heh!

:oops::rolleyes::D
The thing with Kishore is that he is a Singaporean so he is not a neutral party, if you ask me Singapore is just a piece of the Anglosphere on the Malacca straight, that doesn't have a strong man like Lee Kuan Yew anymore to keep westerner capital in check. So Kishore and other Singaporean diplomats have all the reason to keep the Anglo sphere happy. Because the Anglo sphere gave them their money and they can take back their money. That is why they always speak in double tongue. Or like Kishore likes to do in an "balance speak" first tongue lash China 2 times so he can tongue lash the US once.

Don't get me wrong i will still listen to what Kishore has to say but it will always be through a lens of him being someone who has a western capital leash on his neck.

FDI investment sources:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
"Russian tactics are deadly for Ukrainian troops. With daily artillery shelling, short sorties, they keep the Ukrainian troops on their toes, forcing them to constantly fight, to suffer maximum losses" - Former head of Czech Intelligence Andor Šándor.

Automatic translation from Czech:

The Russian is playing for time. And he knows exactly what he's going to achieve. Ukraine's Crimea, that's out. General Shandor tames optimism

"I am skeptical that there is any chance that by autumn Ukraine will have regained the territories it lost, firstly after 2014 and secondly after 24 February last year," says General Andor Shandor, a renowned security adviser and former head of the country's Military Intelligence Service. He speaks of a war of attrition. "The Russians are playing brutally for time and they know well what they will achieve."

While the West is talking about supporting Ukraine for as long as necessary, behind the scenes there is talk of a war ultimatum for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the German daily Bild reports. According to the newspaper, this will be to pressure Kiev if the Ukrainian counter-offensive is unsuccessful and Ukraine fails to recapture the occupied territories by autumn.

"First. Personally, I am sceptical that there is any chance that by autumn Ukraine will recapture the territories it lost, firstly after 2014 and secondly after February 24 last year. Secondly. Western support is also limited in that everything Ukraine asks for to be successful the West either cannot or will not give it. Cannot give is about not having the equipment and especially the ammunition that the Ukrainians would need. The armies are already at their limits. Then there are weapons systems that we don't want to give it, that is, aircraft and other equipment, when we refer to the fact that they don't need it. See Biden's latest comments on F16s," comments security advisor General Andor Shandor.

Sándor sees a dilemma between how we politically support Ukraine and show something that we are not able to fulfill. How public PR is at odds with what we are able or willing to do. “It's very controversial to say whether we should support Ukraine long enough to win before the Russians break it all. We have a number of politicians who believe that Ukraine can win, and any other opinion is ostracized. On the other hand, the option that Ukraine does not have to win is being realistically considered," described Sándor, who reminds us that Russia is a country used to hardship. "A country that has far greater potential, both military and human. It is a country that, unfortunately, has not suffered as much from the sanctions. At the same time, we should say that Russia is not isolated at all. There are many more countries that have not acceded to sanctions. Even Turkey, a country of the North Atlantic Alliance, did not accede to sanctions," Sándor said. “Russia is capable of continuing the conflict for much longer than Ukraine. Therefore, I can imagine that it has two dimensions. One politically open, but also the other, when there may be challenges. It is possible that Biden's trip to Kyiv on February 20 was also about starting to consider a different solution than insisting that Ukraine liberate its entire territory this year. Unrealistic," he added.

The security adviser describes the situation on the battlefield as follows: "Although the Ukrainians recorded some tactical successes, they had successes at the operational level, they liberated the Kharkiv region and part of the Kherson region. Unfortunately, they are not winning at the strategic level."

The North Atlantic Alliance could offer Ukraine a security agreement that would make available to Kiev more modern military technology after the end of the war with Russia. This should prompt Kiev to start truce talks with Russia. But is it realistic? “Finding a way aka smart burner. Will it not be NATO membership, but something more than neutrality or some other form of cooperation? I'm afraid that, of course, one of the reasons for the illegal Russian invasion was Russian objections to the militarization of Ukraine. I'm not sure Russia will like this. We can argue that the Russians have nothing to do with it. But practically, the Russians are trying to destroy the country so that it is not militarized. They fear that an attack on the Russian Federation could be launched from the territory of Ukraine," Sándor said.

A security treaty would not carry as much weight as full membership in the Alliance. Thus, Ukraine would not be covered by the obligation of mutual defense between NATO countries, and the North Atlantic Alliance's soldiers would not be permanently stationed in the country. However, the greater availability of modern Western weapons could deter Moscow from further attacks on a neighboring country.

"I do not think that this is the way to resolve the conflict so that Russia does not interfere in the events in Ukraine. Russia has been interfering in events in Ukraine since 2008, when Ukraine's membership in the North Atlantic Alliance began to be considered. It is some kind of solution. The question is whether the Ukrainians themselves will do it. In principle, it means that they will leave part of the territory to Russia," said Sándor. "In the rhetoric presented by Zelenskyi, it would require a great statesmanship decision to favor some other way of seeing the end of the conflict, to take into account that the prolongation of the conflict will lead to thousands and thousands more dead, wounded and maimed and the destruction of the country. I understand that the Ukrainians do not want to give up the territory. But if they do not have the power to reverse Russian aggression, then it is appropriate to think about other ways to end the conflict. Sunak's proposal could contribute to this. Although I am skeptical that it could be implemented somehow," he added.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was supposed to come up with the proposal. According to the media, Germany and France also agreed. But is it likely? At the same time, the considerations behind the scenes are in sharp contrast to the speeches of US President Joe Biden and other Western leaders who emphasize unity against Russian aggression. "I don't see it as very happy. I'm not sure how Russia would react to this," Sándor added.

What China is proposing is unacceptable to the US
China has now called on Ukraine and Russia to negotiate a ceasefire and has come up with a twelve-point plan to end the war. The Americans swept that off the table. "It shows that what China is proposing is unacceptable to the US, that is to admit that Russia will get all the territories it has conquered, that the sanctions will be lifted... It would mean that Russia would have a free hand and everything at its disposal, which had before the invasion began. Of course, if the peace plan were accepted by everyone, it would increase China's role," Sándor said, adding that China knows very well why it does not want a weakened Russia. "Together with Russia, they will create an effective balance. In my opinion, the US is unnecessarily creating a big enemy out of China, although I understand that China has a number of security problems both with India and including the much-discussed Taiwan. That they mark China as the main adversary for the next decade and at the same time tie their hands in Russia does not strike me as an ideal policy," he added. And he recalled the events of the past: "I think it is a repetition of exactly the same mistake that George Bush Jr. made, when, although he had designated Iran as a country of the axis of evil, he invaded in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein from the government, who was a counterweight in Iraq Shiite Iran. In doing so, he catapulted Iranian influence in the Middle East, leading to disruption in the Middle East, which I didn't think was brilliant. Rather, it seemed completely stupid to me. Politics should be done a little more sensibly. Not creating so many enemies at once. Then it is difficult to deal with it as a whole," he pointed out.

"Russian tactics are deadly for Ukrainian troops."
In the direction of Bachmut, the situation becomes more and more complicated. And what or who does he think will matter how the war ends? "Russian tactics are deadly for Ukrainian troops. They keep the Ukrainian troops in touch with daily artillery shelling and short sorties, forcing them to fight without a break, maximum loss of human lives occurs, on both sides. There is a wear roller. Ukrainians can hardly rest, which complicates the state of the Ukrainian army. It is an attrition tactic on the part of the Russians to make it impossible for the Ukrainians to prepare a spring counter-offensive, on which the further fate of the country could depend," said Sándor. "Contrary to the expectations of many of us, when we thought we would see some big encircling operations of the Russian army, they rather choose this path of daily exhaustion. Ukrainian resources are not unlimited. We see that the promises of technology deliveries are not being fulfilled in terms of numbers, and are delayed. The Russian plays brutally for time and knows very well what he will achieve by doing so. A number of experts and the Americans are appealing to the Ukrainians to stop defending Bakhmut and exhausting themselves in this area, and rather concentrate the limited forces they have to improve their position on the battlefield somewhere else. The idea that Russia will lose Crimea is unrealistic at the moment," concludes the security adviser.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

More Chinese oil and gas deposits for China's energy security. This, along with the new Xinjiang oil fields, shale oil, and the long term energy deals with Russia, Iran, and the Gulf States. China is setting up an energy supply chain that will be nigh impossible to blockade from maritime choke points.
 
Last edited:

Chevalier

Captain
Registered Member
All the countries that have joined with the West in their anti-China campaign have one thing in common. They're truly dependent on exports for their economic survival therefore have hedged their bets on the US which has promised them if China surrenders, the US will cut-up China like a pie like what happened after the Opium Wars giving a piece to all who went along. This way their survival is assured for the foreseeable future turning Chinese into essentially their slaves.
True, it’s why I’ve always maintained that in the event of an Anglo instigated conflict, that the territories of the Five Eyes are forfeit.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

More Chinese oil and gas deposits for China's energy security. This, along with the new Xinjiang oil fields, shale oil, and the long term energy deals with Russia, Iran, and UAE. China is setting up an energy supply chain that will be nigh impossible to blockade from maritime choke points.
…not to mention another trove in forming the basis for the petroyuan, or at least, away from the petrodollar.

and it couldn’t have come at a better time because it’s evident the US seeks to default on its debt by pushing for war so it won’t have to pay be its debt to China along with stealing the reserves of Russia, which would effectively kill the dollar anyhow.

 

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
True, it’s why I’ve always maintained that in the event of an Anglo instigated conflict, that the territories of the Five Eyes are forfeit.

…not to mention another trove in forming the basis for the petroyuan, or at least, away from the petrodollar.

and it couldn’t have come at a better time because it’s evident the US seeks to default on its debt by pushing for war so it won’t have to pay be its debt to China along with stealing the reserves of Russia, which would effectively kill the dollar anyhow.

Luckily for China, US itself resists most attempts to invest in it, while China does not.

"debt" is not going to be very useful. You can't buy F-22s and missiles with confiscated Chinese debt, the debt is literally an IOU which is indefintely postponed except in terms of interest payments. You can't buy more weapons just because you used to have an IOU and now you don't, if you weren't paying the IOU to begin with.

On the other hand, confiscated American hard assets in Asia, ranging from semiconductor tools, factories to land development projects and intangible IP, can directly be pushed into helping China's war effort.
 

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member

That's a very revealing read on American interventionist intentions regarding Taiwan back in the waning days of WWII. I don't know if most of you are familiar with this book provided on that Twitter link since it provides American perspectives, intentions for Taiwan which was never truly noble but as always about hardcore geopolitics along with American prominence at the expense of Chinese sovereignity and dignity.
 

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member

That's a very revealing read on American interventionist intentions regarding Taiwan back in the waning days of WWII. I don't know if most of you are familiar with this book provided on that Twitter link since it provides American perspectives, intentions for Taiwan which was never truly noble but as always about hardcore geopolitics along with American prominence at the expense of Chinese sovereignity and dignity.
America was plotting behind the scenes even during ww2.

Initially, US companies and regime greatly supported nazi Germany. German nazis openly praised and used US as a reference for their own politics. However, as it became clear to America that the nazis were not militarily nor economically sustainable, the genocide of nazis against what Americans view as whites, increased aggression from Germany's ally Japan, America did a full 180 and started supporting the Allies.

Yet, as soon as the war was over, they already planned how to defraud the rest of the allies and replace the defeated attempt to create a nazi world order with their own nationalist American order.

America did this by pardoning nazist war criminals in order to buy out loyalty amount the defeated nazis, integrating their structures into its own. In these plans, they also began to revive nazist claims in order to bring about their vision for a world order, such as Japan's claims against China as well as Germany's plan to create ethnonationalist states in East Europe under the thumb of the Reich.

US was no true ally to neither China nor the Soviet Union in ww2. US soldiers that fought alongside the rest of the allies should be honored for their contribution, but many among their own leaders were only in it not to defeat fascism, but to replace the German-Japanese order with an American order that embraces the same values of white supremacy, genocide and evil.
 
Top